#ProjectEngine #BuildInPublic #FridayFeedback

Rest, Reflection, Reset Week

🐙 Security is a deep dive
👶 Security 101 is just a beginning
💪 Security delivers muscle but the cost is hard to justify
🤖 Security utilities could help generate value

🧵👇

💰 Security audit offers income streams
🪞 Security Projects defend revenue streams
📏 Sprint 1 audit suggests necessary work
🛣️ Sprint roadmap - Grok ➡️ HTML ➡️ Notebook ➡️ 20 steps

🧵👇

✂️ Continue with the Introductory, Intermediate, Intense 5-10-5 lens to support clear, timely delivery
⚗️ Testing Google Vertex may help with coding needed
🫂 Contributing introduces complexity and risks ➡️ Sprint 3

🧵👇

On 1 March 2026, Iranian forces launched drone strikes against Amazon Web Services (AWS) data centres in the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, coinciding with the first day of intensified regional hostilities following US and Zionist strikes that eliminated Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

These operations damaged three facilities: two in the UAE suffered direct hits, igniting fires and forcing power shutdowns, while a Bahrain site sustained structural impact from a nearby drone explosion. AWS confirmed the incidents, noting structural damage, disrupted power delivery, and water-related issues from fire suppression activities, leading to prolonged recovery for affected services.

...

Ten days later, on 11 March 2026, Tasnim News Agency — claimed to be affiliated with the IRGC — published a list designating six US tech companies as “Iran’s new targets”. The firms named were Google (Alphabet), Oracle, Palantir, Nvidia, IBM, and Microsoft, with specific offices, data centres, and infrastructure highlighted in the Zionist entity, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and other Gulf locations.

Tasnim explicitly linked this escalation to the broadening conflict: “As the scope of the regional war expands to infrastructure war, the scope of Iran’s legitimate targets expands”. The list detailed facilities, asserting these assets support military applications tied to the US and the Zionist regime.

The list, disseminated via Tasnim's Telegram channel and titled ‘Iran’s New Targets’, identified approximately 29 locations across Bahrain, the Zionist entity (primarily Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jerusalem, and Be'er Sheva), Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates (mainly Dubai and Abu Dhabi). These encompassed a mix of offices, cloud infrastructure, research and development (R&D) centres, and data facilities, which Tasnim described as "enemy technology infrastructure" allegedly used for adversarial military and intelligence purposes.

Breakdown by company (as detailed in reports citing the Tasnim post):

Amazon: Five facilities, including additional AWS data centres beyond those already struck on 1 March, plus offices in Tel Aviv and Haifa.
Microsoft: Five facilities, including regional offices and cloud-related sites in Tel Aviv and other locations.
IBM: Six facilities, notably its AI research and threat response centre in Be'er Sheva.
Google (Alphabet): Four facilities, including the regional Dubai office (handling advertising and search operations) and its Qatar office for cloud support services.
NVIDIA: Three facilities, prominently featuring its "main and largest R&D centre" in Haifa.
Oracle: Three facilities, including its regional cloud service office in Jerusalem and main office in Abu Dhabi.
Palantir: Three facilities, such as its strategic collaboration centre in Abu Dhabi and regional office in Tel Aviv.
*****************************
Full details of corporate complicity in genocide follow in my latest:

Iran Strikes Data Centres: Escalating Cyber Warfare and Corporate Complicity in Zionist/US attack

Link in replies

Here is the link to the full article: ukcolumn.org/article/iran-s…

Google: Enabling Surveillance and AI Targeting

Google's deep involvement stems from Project Nimbus, the 2021 $1.2 billion cloud contract with Amazon to supply the Zionist government and military with advanced computing and AI services. Leaked documents reveal Google agreed to a “winking mechanism” — a secret alert system notifying the Zionist entity of foreign data access requests, bypassing standard legal processes, as exposed in a joint investigation by The Guardian, +972 Magazine, and Local Call.

As The Intercept reports, Nimbus provides access to AI capabilities including face detection, object tracking, sentiment analysis, and other complex tasks that have been integrated into Israeli military systems for mass surveillance and automated targeting in Gaza and the West Bank, contributing directly to the genocide.

Google's Israeli R&D centres employ former Unit 8200 personnel, fostering seamless tech-intel transfers. Notable examples include:

Gavriel Goidel, who served in Unit 8200 from 2010 to 2016 as Head of Learning (leading teams to analyse patterns of "hostile activists") and now holds the position of Head of Strategy and Operations at Google.
Jonathan Cohen, a former Unit 8200 team leader (2000–2003), who has spent over 13 years in senior Google roles, and is currently Head of Insights, Data and Measurement.
These hires exemplify the pipeline from Zionist intelligence to Silicon Valley leadership, where ex-Unit 8200 operatives bring expertise in signals intelligence, data analysis, and cyber operations directly into corporate AI and cloud development.

In US-Zionist operations against Iran, Google's AI models support drone surveillance and predictive analytics, aiding identification of nuclear and military sites. While direct attribution remains classified, broader US military adoption of frontier AI (including large language models for intelligence summarisation and target prioritisation) intersects with Google's capabilities.

SitRep - 27/03/26 - New attacks in the Leningrad region

An overview of the daily events in Russia's invasion of Ukraine. For a third consecutive day, Ukrainian drones attacked the Leningrad region, aiming for oil facitilies in Ust-Luga and Primorsk.

REPOST=appreciated

1/X

Missed the latest?

https://x.com/NOELreports/status/2037438319592702124

As usual we start with Russian losses

https://x.com/NOELreports/status/2037438669569642685

STOP TELLING CHATGPT “CHECK MY GRAMMAR AND WRITING.

Bad prompt = Bad result.

Use these prompts and you’ll see the difference:

1. The Professional Editor

“Act as a professional editor and rewrite the following text to correct grammar, errors, punctuation, and clarity. Keep my original meaning but dramatically improve the structure and readability. Here is the text: [paste text].”

2. Grammar Perfection + Tone

“Correct all grammar issues, errors, and awkward phrasing in this text: [paste text]. Then rewrite it in a clean, professional, and confident tone without changing my message.”

The loss of our humanity and valuing life is one of the major themes in Kurt Vonnegut Jr's books. His major points were: Human life is precious but often treated cheaply. Systems (war, corporations, technology) can strip away empathy.
1)

https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2037321188419211463

We must consciously choose kindness and compassion. His words feel like a warning today.

There are those praying for G-d's mercy after seeing how wicked we have become to believe euthanization is the answer to the trauma this young woman experienced throughout her life.
2)

Those meant to protect Noelia Castillo Ramos failed her miserably and then, washed their hands.
3)

German Defence Chief, Breuer: In 2029, Russia could wage a major war against a NATO country.

It is building up its military to a strength nearly doubling from before the war against Ukraine.

I've never experienced a situation that dangerous like it is today. 1/

Breuer: Capabilities Europe needs to acquire in the next 3 to 4 years: drones, precision strike, and space capabilities. These are the most urgent needs.

We put them on a prioritized list, and we are working it. We are good on our way to do so. 2/

Breuer: We can’t think in boxes anymore. It’s not the European theater and the Middle East theater.

We have to connect the dots. Those theaters are intertwined. What happens in one theater has impact on the other. This has shaped our military strategy. 3X

Dark circles make you look 5 years older, permanently exhausted, and unwell, even on your best days.

And all you hear is “Just sleep more”. And I know you’ve tried that.

Dark circles have 6 different causes and sleep is only one of them. Here's how to find yours. 🧵

Why this matters: the cause determines the treatment.

- Under-eye creams without knowing what type of dark circles you have is useless.
- Vitamin K cream won't help you if your problem is pigmentation.
- A brightening serum won't help if your problem is volume loss.
- No cream will help if your problem is genetic.
Figure out the type first. Then treat it.

Type 1: Pigmentation-based dark circles

Look: Brown or dark brown. Consistent colour. More common in Indian skin.

What's happening: Excess melanin deposited under the eye. Can be genetic, from chronic rubbing, allergies that make you rub your eyes, sun exposure, or post-inflammatory changes.

How to confirm: Pull the skin gently. The dark colour remains in the skin itself and doesn't shift much.

What helps: Sunscreen around the eyes (yes, daily), vitamin C, kojic acid, alpha arbutin, niacinamide in eye-safe formulations.
In clinic: Q-switched laser, chemical peels specifically for periorbital pigmentation.

What makes it worse: Rubbing your eyes. Any friction. Skipping SPF.

Alex Sanders, the "King of the Witches," recruited over 1,000 followers into more than 100 covens. He initiated Sharon Tate into witchcraft in 1967. Sanders claimed that at age 10 his grandmother left him with Aleister Crowley, who used him in a sex magick ritual and branded him.

https://twitter.com/toxictiramisu/status/2030746199632830577

Alex Sanders said his grandmother left him overnight with Aleister Crowley, who performed sex magick with him and marked his hand with a "mark of the beast."

Alex Sanders initiated Sharon Tate into witchcraft during the filming of The Eye of the Devil in 1967.

@michaeldweiss 1).
„ @VP @JDVance took @IsraeliPM Benjamin @netanyahu to task in a Monday phone call for overstating the possibility that the US-Israeli bombing campaign in Iran could topple its regime, @axios reported Friday [1], citing a US source and an Israeli source [2].”

March 27, 2026

@michaeldweiss @VP @JDVance @IsraeliPM @netanyahu @axios 2).
[1] @axios axios.com/2026/03/27/van…

[2] @TimesofIsrael timesofisrael.com/in-tense-call-…

@michaeldweiss @VP @JDVance @IsraeliPM @netanyahu @axios @TimesofIsrael Please unroll @threadreaderapp. Thank you in advance 𓃠

saw several, *somewhere*??

so sinister??

sssh??

Claude knows! —>

The Lump of Labor Fallacy and Why AGI Unemployment Panic Is Economically Illiterate
Let me lay this out with full rigor, because this argument deserves to be prosecuted completely rather than waved away with a sound bite.

I. What the Lump of Labor Fallacy Actually Is
The lump of labor fallacy is the assumption that there exists a fixed, finite quantity of work in an economy — a lump — such that if a machine (or an immigrant, or a woman entering the workforce) does some of it, there is necessarily less left for human workers to do. It treats employment as a zero-sum pie.
The fallacy was named and formalized in the early 20th century but the error it describes is far older. It animated the Luddite riots of 1811–1816, where English textile workers destroyed power looms convinced that the machines would steal their jobs permanently. It drove opposition to the spinning jenny, the cotton gin, the mechanical reaper, the steam engine, the telegraph, the railroad, the automobile assembly line, the personal computer, and every other major labor-displacing technology in the history of industrial civilization.
Every single time, the catastrophists were wrong. Not partially wrong. Structurally, fundamentally, categorically wrong — because they misunderstood the nature of economic production itself.
The reason the fixed-pie assumption fails is this: demand is not fixed. Work generates income. Income generates demand for goods and services. Demand for goods and services generates new categories of work. This is an engine, not a reservoir. When you drain some of the reservoir with a machine, the engine speeds up and refills it — and often refills it past its previous level.

II. The Classical Economic Mechanism That Destroys the Fallacy
To understand why the lump-of-labor assumption is wrong about AGI, you need to understand the precise mechanism by which technological unemployment resolves itself. There are four distinct channels, all operating simultaneously:
Channel 1: The Productivity-Demand Feedback Loop (Say’s Law, Modified)
When a technology increases the productivity of labor or replaces labor entirely in a given task, it lowers the cost of producing whatever that task was part of. Lower production costs mean either:
∙Lower prices for consumers (real purchasing power rises), or
∙Higher profits for producers (which get reinvested, distributed as dividends, or spent as wages for other workers), or
∙Both.
Either way, aggregate real income in the economy rises. That additional real income does not evaporate. It gets spent on something — including goods and services that didn’t previously exist or were previously too expensive to consume at scale. That spending creates demand. That demand creates jobs.
This is not a theoretical conjecture. The average American in 1900 spent roughly 43% of their income on food. Today it’s around 10%. Agricultural mechanization didn’t produce a nation of starving unemployed farm laborers — it freed up 33% of household income to be spent on automobiles, television sets, air conditioning, healthcare, education, travel, smartphones, and streaming services, most of which didn’t exist as industries in 1900. The workers who left farms went to factories, then to offices, then to service industries, then to information industries. The economy didn’t run out of work. It metamorphosed.

https://x.com/pmarca/status/2037815241892151688

Channel 2: The Baumol Effect and the Inexhaustibility of Human Want
William Baumol’s “cost disease” is usually discussed as a problem, but it contains within it the answer to why technological unemployment can never be permanent at the macroeconomic level.
Baumol observed that productivity gains are uneven across sectors. Sectors that are easily mechanized (manufacturing, agriculture, data processing) see dramatic productivity increases; sectors that resist mechanization (live performance, personal care, bespoke services, therapy, teaching, craft) do not. As mechanized sectors get cheaper, the relative price of labor-intensive sectors rises, and society allocates more of its spending toward them — not less.
This means technology creates a systematic tilt toward human-intensive services precisely because it succeeds in automating the easily automated stuff. The more AGI automates routine cognitive work, the more valuable — and more in demand — genuine human connection, judgment, creativity, and embodied physical skill become. Not as a consolation prize, but because relative scarcity drives relative price and therefore relative employment.
Channel 3: Comparative Advantage and the Ricardo Insight
David Ricardo’s law of comparative advantage is one of the few truly non-obvious and consistently correct insights in all of economics, and it applies directly here.
Even if AGI becomes absolutely better than humans at every cognitive task — faster, cheaper, more accurate, more creative — it does not follow that humans have no economic role. What matters is comparative advantage: what can humans produce at the lowest opportunity cost relative to AGI?
Ricardo proved this with trade between nations: England should produce cloth and Portugal should produce wine even if Portugal is more productive at both, because specializing in their comparative advantages and trading leaves both better off than autarky. The same logic applies to humans and AGI. If AGI is 10x better at legal reasoning but 1,000x better at data entry, humans should do legal reasoning and let AGI do data entry — even though AGI dominates absolutely at both.
The AGI unemployment catastrophists implicitly assume that comparative advantage can somehow be zero — that there is literally nothing humans can do where the opportunity cost tradeoff favors human labor. This is not just empirically unsupported; it’s almost mathematically impossible given the structure of the argument. As long as human time has any value to humans themselves (which it trivially does), and as long as there is any production that requires human presence, consent, or subjective experience, comparative advantage exists.
Channel 4: New Industry Creation (The Jobs-That-Don’t-Exist-Yet Problem)
This is the channel that the catastrophists most egregiously ignore, perhaps because it’s the hardest to model in advance. The most important jobs created by technological revolutions are jobs that simply couldn’t have been predicted before the technology existed.
In 1900, nobody predicted that “film editor,” “radio broadcaster,” “airline pilot,” “software engineer,” “UX designer,” “social media manager,” or “podcast producer” would be major occupational categories. These jobs didn’t exist. They emerged from the new technological landscape and then became massive employers.
The argument against AGI-driven unemployment is not that we can predict exactly what the new jobs will be. The argument is that the historical base rate of technology creating new job categories at least as fast as it destroys old ones is 100% across every major technological transition in recorded economic history. Opponents of this view need to explain why this time is categorically different in a way that would break a pattern that has held without exception for 250 years of industrialization.

III. The Specific Structure of the AGI Unemployment Argument and Where It Goes Wrong
The AGI catastrophist argument typically runs like this:
1.AGI will be capable of performing any cognitive task a human can perform.
2.Cognitive tasks constitute the majority of employment in advanced economies.
3.Therefore, AGI will be able to replace the majority of workers.
4.Therefore, mass permanent unemployment follows.
Step 3 to Step 4 is where the lump of labor fallacy smuggles itself in. The argument assumes that the quantity of cognitive work to be done is fixed, such that when AGI does it, humans are left with nothing. But this is precisely what is not true, for all four channels described above.
Let me be more specific about how each gap in the argument fails:
Gap A: “AGI can do the task” ≠ “There is no more task to do”
When spreadsheets replaced bookkeepers in the 1980s, they did not reduce the total amount of financial analysis done in the American economy. They increased it, massively, because the cost of analysis fell, which meant more analysis got demanded, which meant more analysts got hired — to do more complex, higher-value analysis that the spreadsheets enabled. Automation of the low end of a cognitive spectrum does not eliminate work in that domain; it shifts the frontier of what human effort gets applied to upward.
AGI will do the same thing. If AGI can draft a competent first-pass legal brief in 30 seconds, law firms won’t employ zero lawyers. They’ll employ lawyers who review, refine, strategize, negotiate, argue in court, build client relationships, exercise judgment in novel situations — and they’ll take on far more cases per lawyer because the cost per case has fallen. Total legal work done in the economy will increase, not decrease, because more people will be able to afford it.
Gap B: The Argument Ignores Price Effects on Demand
The catastrophist framing treats the displacement of workers as a pure subtraction problem. But displaced workers who find new jobs (as they historically do) are also consumers. The productivity gains from AGI don’t disappear into a void — they show up as lower prices, higher real wages, or both. Higher real purchasing power means more consumption of more goods and services, which means more demand for labor to produce them.
Furthermore, the catastrophist argument generally ignores what happens to the profits generated by AGI-driven productivity. Those profits go to shareholders, who spend and invest them, creating demand elsewhere. Or they get competed away in product markets, lowering prices and raising real consumer purchasing power. Either pathway generates demand for labor.
The only scenario where this mechanism fails is one where the gains from AGI are so concentrated and the distribution so pathologically skewed that effective aggregate demand collapses — which is a political economy problem (a distributional problem solvable through tax policy and redistribution) rather than a fundamental unemployment problem caused by the technology itself.

9 Powerful Lessons from the book "SURROUNDED BY LIARS"